"SAT scandal shows tyranny of standardized testing"

In Great Neck, New York, a town in Long Island, twenty students have been arrested for their involvement in an SAT testing scandal.  Samuel Eshaghoff and many others have been arrested on criminal charges for impersonating high school students to take the SAT.  The author of the article, Nicolaus Mills, argues that "if colleges and high schools sit back and regard the Long Island scandal as primarily a security issue to be corrected by better policing, they are failing in their mission. They bear a huge responsibility for the degree to which a high score on a standardized test has become disproportionately important for college admission."  To Mills, this is representative of a greater issue in the college admissions process, and that is that high SAT scores are a student's ticket into their first-choice college.  He argues that "this obsessive focus is exactly the opposite of the generous ideal that in 1934 led Harvard president James Bryant Conant to pioneer the use of the SAT, Scholastic Aptitude Test, for admission to Harvard. Conant's aim was to find worthy students in schools across the country who were not part of the elite private school system from which Harvard traditionally drew most of its students."  Mills believes that admissions offices should try to more effectively balance an applicant's SAT scores with a more complex look at the overall applicant. 
With the number of applicants to undergraduate colleges increasing rapidly, especially at big-name state schools, admissions officers are left with no choice but to rely on SAT scores and GPA.  There are simply too many applicants to assess for them to spend more time on each applicant.  With this recent scandal, I think that we do need to examine the nature of organizations like The College Board, and how much of an influence their tests are having on college admissions.  Should admissions committee's treat the test with less influence, or should they continue to rely on it heavily as a measure of admission for incoming students?  Some schools are now test-optional, and they continue to admit some of the most intelligent students in the nation.  Maybe the SAT will someday be totally gone.

NFL to refs: Be aware of head injuries

In a story on ESPN, referees in the NFL are now being instructed to look for player's concussions on the field.  Recently, San Diego Chargers guard Kris Dielman suffered a concussion in a game versus the Jets, and he had a seizure upon landing back in San Diego.  Dielman clearly looked shaken up on the play, but he stayed in on his own account, so there was no way the officials could have stepped in to remove him from the game.  The NFL has been moving to protect its players, specifically against concussions, and this movement will hopefully help prevent concussions.  However, many people argue that it should be up to the players own judgment to take themselves out of the game.  They should be smart enough to protect their own health.  Nothing bad should come from this movement, because the referees are now only another pair of eyes looking out for the players.  The only way it could be a problem is if a referee uses his own judgement to take a player out of the game, even though the player makes it clear that he does not have a concussion.  There has not been commentary from the players on this issue yet, but I do not know if they are in favor of it or not.  I would think that they would like to have control over taking themselves in or out of a game, concussed or not.  Hopefully this prevents future concussions.

Sean Avery

A fan-favorite at Madison Square Garden is making a comeback, as the Rangers have called up Sean Avery from the Hartford Whale.  Avery has been a fan-favorite because of his playing style.  He does everything possible to annoy the other team, and it seems to work.  The NHL even imposed the "Avery rule"after he interfered with goalie Martin Brodeur during a game by standing in front of him and waving his stick in his face, distracting him, which led to a Rangers goal.  The ESPN "Cross Checks" blog is saying that Avery's return to the Rangers won't be very significant.  Avery's play has deteriorated with his age, but I still think that he'll be a spark plug for the Rangers. The author of ESPN's blog thinks that Avery won't appear in many games for the Rangers, even though tons of fans will be chanting his name.  He's a character, and the fans love him.  John Tortorella, the head coach of the Rangers, does not view Avery as an impact player, even though many of the fans do.  It will be interesting to see how much playing time Sean Avery gets, and if the fans chanting will affect Coach Tortorella's decision to play him.

False Sense of Reality in "True Enough"

Farhad Manjoo’s True Enough exposes the American public’s inability to think objectively, and how biases are subconsciously formed as individuals are fed information from different forms of media.  Now more than ever, Americans are forced to question reality, as theories that seemingly have no factual evidence are accepted.  Individuals with prestigious credentials speak persuasively and others believe them, even though they may be speaking “gobbledygook”.  Manjoo does not provide us with a solution for overcoming the false sense of reality that the media has created; he simply exposes us to the dangers of technology and globalization.  He describes how “no longer are we merely holding opinions different from one another; we’re also holding different facts” (2).  The most that we can do is recognize that this false sense of reality is tearing society apart.  By recognizing how information is constantly mangled to appeal to the biases of certain individuals, we can strive towards living in a society that eliminates making decisions based upon a false sense of reality.

The false sense of reality that is present in American society is heightened by “the burrowing underground of propaganda, the transformation of salesmanship from a flashy, street-corner affair to a quiet, dressed-up sport of cunning and deceit” (201).  Subconsciously, individuals are fed information that they process without even recognizing it.  VNR’s are implanted into newscasts, as advertisers have discovered that people are more likely to remember a product in this medium than in an actual commercial.  This creates an emotional response that appeals to the senses.  We suddenly feel like we need to buy Snickers, for example, as a Halloween snack. 

          Manjoo further exposes us to our vulnerability in accessing reliable sources of information through the Dr. Fox experiment.  In this experiment a comedian said “a whole lot in a style that suggested something of great import but that was actually complete nonsense” (113).  Someone who knew absolutely nothing about a subject could convince listeners that he was an expert on the subject, based on pure humor and personal style.  He managed to fool actual experts in a field, just by talking persuasively.  In fact, “students who were shown lectures that were high in both content and expressiveness reported the most satisfaction with their professor” (116).  As a society, America seemingly appreciates “style over substance” (116).  This certainly highlights our inability to perceive information correctly, and how a false sense of reality affects our ability to make decisions.  

Bias in "True Enough"

From reading the first half of "True Enough", Manjoo has showed me how biased we all are.  Nearly everything that is presented to us is formulated by a biased opinion, and then we formulate our own biased opinions.  Statistics are analyzed in a biased manner, in order to present facts that seem to support a certain view.  The major news networks, such as Fox and CNN, only present biased viewpoints to us now.  

Reporters like Anderson Cooper have made it big by voicing their opinions.  Cooper went after government officials during Hurricane Katrina because of their slow response time and urgency to aid disaster victims.  As viewers, we like to listen to the viewpoints of those who agree with us, as they reinforce our already existing biases.  

The way in which a person presents information is often more influential than what they are actually saying.  The Dr. Fox experiments show us that we are more tuned in to accepting peripheral cues than actually processing information and forming our own opinions.  Because Dr. Fox lectured students in a very expressive manner, they rated him very highly, even though there was no relevant content within his speech.  Just because he appeared to be knowledgeable, and he presented his argument in a persuasive manner, everybody loved him.  This is similar to how patients took incorrect advice on cold treatment because the doctor seemed warm and trustworthy, whereas they ignored a doctor's proper advice because he seemed careless and boring.  Our biases affect our decisions everyday. 

"True Enough" Reaction

          "True Enough" by Farhad Manjoo has been an eye-opening read so far.  Over the last few years, I have become aware of some of the conspiracy theories around the world.  Manjoo further examines these conspiracies when he describes how these theories actually gain momentum.  He describes a movement during World War II in which a shortage of protein would occur unless housewives began serving organ meats for their families.  The government persuaded housewives to serve this meat by changing what was acceptable for them.  This revealed that "what we understand to be the "truth" around us-is defined through our interactions with other people" (52).  Just because the housewives engaged in "organ-meat discussion groups", they were able to change their habits because they mutually agreed to serve organ meat. 
          Additionally, with the constant evolution of technology, it's becoming harder to understand what actually is real.  Manjoo describes this perfectly when he states "To light, the real danger of living in the age of Photoshop isn't the proliferation of fake photos.  Rather, it's that true photos will be ignored as phonies" (82).  Will photots someday lose all of their credibility?  Someone could easily photoshop an entire gallery of fake photos, in which they boast achievements that they never actually achieved.  At what point will we have to question how real our own photos are?  And when will every photo out there be suspect to investigation?  It's amazing how much technology can help us, yet at the same time hurt us.  How much of what we see in the media is true, and how much is false? And how much is technology separating what we perceive to be the truth, and what actually is the truth? 

"True Enough" First Glance

After reading the first 25 pages of "True Enough" by Farhad Manjoo, I am excited to see how the book will play out.  Manjoo brings up some very interesting points, such as how we are no longer "holding opinions different from one another; we're also holding different facts."  How can we deny scientific fact and take a position that isn't backed by empirical evidence?  And how are so many people drawn towards some opinions that seem so foolish?
Though Manjoo gave mention to many examples throughout the introduction, the one that struck me most was about the three-and-a-half-year-old girl, Eliza Jane Scovill, who died from the AIDS virus because her mother "had come to accept the unconventional views of a set of activists who argue that HIV does not cause AIDS."  Her mother refused to give her treatment because she saw validity in some bogus views of other activists.  I saw a Law and Order SVU episode exactly like this where the mother refused treatment for her daughter.  What's worst is that the mother is the one passing on the HIV virus, but she feels as if her daughter should not receive treatment.  Manjoo's stance, that now more than ever we are holding different facts, is a little bit scary.